<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (2) TMI 142 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448991</link>
    <description>Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority for legal proceedings instituted by a liquidator on behalf of the corporate debtor. Where an earlier approval had already authorised the liquidator to defend and prosecute proceedings for the corporate debtor, that approval was held sufficient to cover the later writ petition filed to protect the corporate debtor&#039;s interests. In that setting, the later application sought only clarification and regularisation of the position, and the Adjudicating Authority ought to have clarified the approval rather than reject the request. The writ petition was therefore treated as covered by the prior approval, and ratification was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Feb 2024 08:24:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 142 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448991</link>
      <description>Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority for legal proceedings instituted by a liquidator on behalf of the corporate debtor. Where an earlier approval had already authorised the liquidator to defend and prosecute proceedings for the corporate debtor, that approval was held sufficient to cover the later writ petition filed to protect the corporate debtor&#039;s interests. In that setting, the later application sought only clarification and regularisation of the position, and the Adjudicating Authority ought to have clarified the approval rather than reject the request. The writ petition was therefore treated as covered by the prior approval, and ratification was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>